SM #2 Drivers PDF

Sustainable Manufacturing
BITS Pilani K S Sangwan

Pilani Campus
BITS Pilani
Pilani Campus
SM Drivers
website / Youtube
BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

SM Drivers
Development of SM drivers
Ranking of SM drivers
Modelling of SM drivers
Testing of SM drivers
Case Study

SM Drivers
Manufacturing firms face multiple motivations called 'drivers'

which are motivating and/or forcing the industry to adopt SM.
These drivers include competitiveness among firms, governing
legislation of the state, availability of green and efficient
technology, and incentives in the form of subsidies, tax
exemptions provided by the government to promote the
dissemination of SM adoption.
The driving factors play active role in adoption and diffusion of
SM in industry. Availability of comprehensive overview of the
drivers would raise awareness and convince the firms to
justify investments on newer systems. There are number of
factors that act as drivers for the implementation of SM.
Understanding of these drivers is necessary to implement SM
effectively.

SM Drivers …
Current Legislation Customer Demand

Future Legislation Supply Chain Pressure
Incentives Top Management Commitment
Public Pressure Public Image
Peer Pressure Technology
Cost Savings Organizational Resources
Competitiveness

Current Legislation
Pollution control, landfill taxes, emission trading, polluted water

discharge norms, eco-label, etc.
Contrary to the traditional thought of considering market as a
main driving force, the command-and-control regulation has
over many years promoted diffusion of environmental
technologies, such as waste-water treatment plants, chimney
emission filters, environmental control technologies, etc
The financial penalties such as taxes and levies can also
encourage firms with low environmental commitment to
engage in environmental improvements within their operations
Based on the international agreement on climate change (Kyoto
Protocol) from 1997 and legislation of the European Union,
German companies have to buy certificates to be allowed to
emit green house gases

Future Legislation
Expected development of stricter laws, increased level of

enforcement
The stringency of laws in some countries is still lacking and
future improvements can easily motivate companies to
enhance their environmental performance
Not only pressure from the current legislation, but is also
anticipating future regulations put pressure
For instance, market expectations for the next generation
of gasoline engines are: improved performance, lower
toxic emissions to meet future legislation, and reduced
fuel consumption to help meet future legislation linked to
Green House Gas emissions (including CO2)

Incentives
Investment subsidies, awards, R&D support, tax exemptions, etc.
In addition to comply with regulations, financial incentives try to improve
the green level of businesses with attractive loans, grants or tax
exemptions for capital investments
Empirical evidences support that financial incentives, like tax breaks or
duty free imports, influence the companies investment strategy for
environmental technologies
In Germany the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation
and Nuclear Safety (BMU) provides, together with the state-owned
bank KfW, loans and grants for companies to invest in environment
friendly production technologies
In India environmental research in industry is supported by the government
through priority programs, financial and institutional support (Ministry of
Environment and Forests, 2006). Incentive policies programs started by
the government that educate business on the benefits of corporate
environmental responsibility (CER), especially economic incentives may
act as driver for encouraging CER.

Public Pressure
Another driver for industry is the public awareness of

environment and sustainability issues and the active
pressure of various stakeholders to change industrial
environmental behaviour
Local communities, politicians, NGOs, media, insurance
companies, banks.

Peer Pressure
A different form of social pressure can be exerted by

industrial peers like trade and business associations
These networks are placed within industry and promote
ECM. Through networks these synergies can be shared
and thus companies are pressurizing each other to
enhance their environmental performance.

Cost Savings
It has become clear to many industries that investments in
cleaner technologies can reduce costs, for example, by
saving on green taxes imposed by Environmental Protection
Act of the government which demands the implementation of
best available technologies
Reduction of energy consumption, rising energy costs, reduction
in virgin material use, less waste output, etc.
Past statistics shows that in the last 25 years, total expenses of
the US business sector was over ten trillion US dollars. The
annual expense in eliminating and controlling pollution was
about 1.2 trillion US dollars
Studies in India revealed, that green manufacturing has a very
high potential to reduce the costs in a company for waste
handling, storage and disposal, as well as packaging and
maintenance cost

Competitiveness
Better process performances, higher product quality, higher

efficiency, competing with best-practices in sector
Those organizations have advantages in their cost
structures through a higher degree of efficiency which
enables them to act more independently on the markets
A study investigating drivers for eco-innovation in the
European Union revealed, that managers expect a future
increase in energy prices and that this is the main driver
for eco-innovation and development in Europe
The reasons for greening the industries go beyond ethical
issues to gain competitive advantages

Customer Demand
Consumers are undoubtedly an increasingly important

force that shapes the social responsibility of
organizations
The purchase and consumption behaviour is more and
more formed by ethical criteria and customers prefer
buying environmental friendly manufactured products
End-user demand for environmentally friendly products

Supply Chain Pressure
Every company is part of a supply chain, consisting of

different suppliers and distributors, interacting with each
other. These business partners can drive an organization
to implement green manufacturing technologies and
practices
Organizations try to improve its environmental
performance, like suppliers need to change processes in
order to enable an increase of the overall performance of
the entire supply chain
Demand of suppliers, distributors, OEM, compliance with
legislation in global markets

Top Management Commitment
Top management commitment has a crucial influence over

the organizational culture of the company
Leadership has to provide a vision needed to achieve a
green level in manufacturing
Volkswagen AG has committed to become more
environment friendly and expresses this by celebrating
World Environment Day at their site in Pune
Management, owner or investors, ethics and social values
of the top management, etc.

Public Image
Importance of a positive public perception of your company,

green image, etc.
The reputation or image of the company in public is very
important to survive in the market
Some companies see the initiatives not as a responsibility,
but their future strategy and survival as competitive and
economic decision
The positive public perception of a company can be used
for green marketing to gain new environmentally
conscious customers

Technology
A major part of GM is the implementation and usage of new

technologies.
Green technologies have specific characteristics that foster
for energy and resource efficiency and effectiveness.
Examples are the usage of energy-savings lamps,
metalworking fluids based on renewable resources or
energy-efficient electric motors. Often the performance
of the technology can be important regardless of its
environmental impact.
Opportunities, advantages or performances of available
green and efficient technology

Organizational Resources
Organizational resources refer to all capabilities of the

organization to carry out and innovate
Availability of skilled staff and funds for SM.
If green metrics and goals are implemented in the
corporate strategy, achievements are visible and people
are accountable for them
A healthy financial situation makes it more likely for a
company to invest in green technologies, especially in
capital-intensive cleaner technologies

BITS Pilani
Pilani Campus
Ranking of Drivers
Descriptive statistics of data
Std. Cronbach's Alpha if

Drivers Mean
Deviation Item Deleted
Current Legislation 3.4211 1.13530 0.837
Future Legislation 3.5158 0.99854 0.831
Incentives 3.1158 1.07053 0.825
Public Pressure 2.8105 1.06486 0.828
Peer Pressure 2.7579 0.84697 0.842
Cost Savings 4.0000 0.85053 0.834
Competitiveness 3.8947 0.97275 0.832
Customer Demand 3.5158 1.06054 0.819
Supply Chain Pressure 3.0842 1.09800 0.825
Top Management Commitment 3.9158 1.06854 0.827
Public Image 3.6316 1.04222 0.832
Technology 3.5053 1.06065 0.827
Organizational Resources 3.5263 1.00892 0.828

RANKING OF GM DRIVERS
GOAL:
Ranking of Drivers
Government Industry perspective Expert perspective

perspective [C1] [C2] [C3]
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 D13

Criteria for ranking drivers
Criteria Definition Criteria

type
Government View of officials from government
perspective departments handling industrial
environmental policies
Importance
Industry View of officials from industry
perspective handling industrial and environmental (the more
policies the better)
Expert View of officials from expert groups
perspective working on environmental issues

Aggregate Ranking (co-eff)
Peer Pressure Importance of GM Drivers

Public Pressure
Current Legislation
Future Legislation
Public Image
Customer Demand
Cost Savings
Technology
Incentives
Competitiveness
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6
Closeness Coefficient (CCi)

Rank of drivers (government,
industry and expert perspectives)
Experts perspective Industry perspective Government perspective
Technology
Public Image
Customer Demand
Competitiveness
Cost Savings
Peer Pressure
Public Pressure
Incentives
Future Legislation
Current Legislation
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7
Closeness Coefficent (CCi)

Rank of Drivers
Rank Driver Name

1 Competitiveness [D7]
2 Incentives [D3]
3 Organizational Resources [D13]
4 Technology [D12]
5 Cost Savings [D6]
6 Top Management Commitment [D10]
7 Customer Demand [D8]
8 Supply Chain Pressure [D9]
9 Public Image [D11]
10 Future Legislation [D2]
11 Current Legislation [D1]
12 Public Pressure [D4]
13 Peer Pressure [D5]

Results and Discussion
The results clearly show that driver competitiveness (rank 1) is

the highest ranked driver and incentives (rank 2) is the
second highest ranked driver, followed by organizational
resources (rank 3).
In other words, these three drivers are rated as most important
for the adoption of SM in Indian industry.
The competitiveness among the organizations to grab more and
more market share can motivate them for adoption of SM,
provided the support of the government in terms of incentives,
tax exemptions, and subsidies.
The availability of the skilled manpower to implement newer
technologies can further make it possible for small companies
like SMEs to adopt the SM.

Results and Discussion …
Availability of green and efficient technology (rank 4/) to the
organizations is vital for diffusion of GM in the industry which can
reduce cost (rank 5) of manufacturing by consuming lesser energy
and material.
Also, the willingness of the management (rank 6) to adopt SM
voluntarily is important driver, which is an outcome of corporate
social responsibility of the organization.
Customer demand (rank 7) and supply chain pressure (rank 8) are
moderately important in India perhaps because of less demand of
green products by price sensitive customers.
Public image (rank 9), future legislation (rank 10), current legislation
(rank 11), public pressure (rank 12), and peer pressure (rank 13) are
least important and low rank drivers in emerging countries like India
because of lack of information and awareness about the important of
green products and processes, which will create the importance of
public image in the mind of customers. The pressure from public and
peer is also least important driver.

BITS Pilani
Pilani Campus
Modelling of Drivers
An ISM model of drivers
Incentives Cost Savings Competitiveness
Top Management Organizational

Technology
Commitment Resources
Future Supply Chain

Legislation Pressure
Current
Public Image
Legislation
Customer Public Peer

Demand Pressure Pressure

Hierarchical Model
The developed ISM model consists of five levels of hierarchy as shown in figure
The first level, consisting of public pressure, peer pressure and customer demand
drivers, is termed as awareness level. These three drivers have the maximum
driving power and minimum dependence as shown in the MICMAC results in
next slides.
This means that the policy makers in government have to spread the awareness of
SM, which in turn force the individual organizations to adopt SM.
Second and third level drivers are external to the organizations in nature and these
drivers force the organizations to adopt SM. For example, the emission norms
for vehicle in different countries are forcing the organizations to adopt SM to fulfil
the current legislations and be ready for future improved legislations. Similarly,
many multinational organizations are forcing the small and medium enterprises
(SMEs) in their supply chain to implement SM. The legislation enforced by the
government for environmental management motivates the organizations to
adopt SM. Once, the organization has been motivated (by level I drivers) or
forced (by level II and III drivers) to implement SM, next is to develop human
and technological resources in the organization.

Hierarchical Model
There are three drivers at level IV termed as organizational level.

Top management may be forces to adopt SM by coercive
drivers at level II and III but it is very difficult to motivate
managers at middle and lower levels to implement SM if its
adoption does not improve productivity and quality. Therefore,
it has been observed that SM implementation may require
specific human resources at middle and lower levels.
SM adoption generally requires better and efficient technologies.
Top level (level V) drivers are the expected benefits of the SM
implementation in term of incentives provided by the state in
terms of tax exemptions, subsidized loans, allotment of land,
etc. or cost savings achieved through consumption of lesser
amount of energy and materials or improved competitiveness
among the peers.

Hierarchical Model
The hierarchy and inter-relationships developed by the ISM

model provide a direction to the policy makers in the
government and industry to strategically leverage their
resources for easy adoption of GM. The visual model is
also expected to dissipate the benefits of the GM to
larger number of people inside and outside the
organization for better change management. It will help
to prioritize the strategies for GM adoption. The model is
also expected to help the industry managers (i) to justify
GM adoption to senior management (ii) to make the
employees understand their role during GM adoption (iii)
to convey reasons of GM adoption.

MICMAC Analysis
13
12
11 4,5 4th 3rd
8
10
9 1
11
Driving Power
8
7 2,9
6
5
4 1st 10,12 2nd
13
3 3,6
7
2
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Dependence

MICMAC analysis
Drivers are classified into four clusters named autonomous drivers,
dependent drivers, linkage drivers, and independent drivers.
Autonomous drivers (first cluster) have weak driving power and weak
dependence, so these drivers are generally disconnected from the
system.
The second cluster is named dependent drivers. These drivers have weak
driving power and strong dependence power. Five drivers namely
incentives, cost savings, competitiveness, top management
commitment, technology, and organizational resources (3, 6, 7, 10, 12
and 13) belong to this cluster.
The third cluster is named as linkage drivers having strong driving power
and strong dependence power. In this study, no driver lies in first and
third clusters.
The fourth cluster is named as independent drivers which has strong
driving power and weak dependence power. Seven drivers namely
current legislation, future legislation, public pressure, peer pressure,
customer demand, supply chain pressure, and public image (1, 2, 4, 5,
8, 9 and 11) belong to this cluster.

MICMAC Analysis
Higher value of 'dependence' for a driver means that other

drivers in the network are to be addressed first. High
value of 'driving force' of a driver means that these
drivers are to be addressed before taking up the other
drivers.

BITS Pilani
Pilani Campus
Testing of Drivers: An Empirical Study

Methodology
Driver Development
Survey Instrument Development
Data Collection
Data Analysis
Model proposition
(Exploratory Factor Analysis)
Model Validation
(Confirmatory factor Analysis and
Structural Equation Modeling)

Survey instrument development
survey questionnaire asks the participants to rate the

importance of drivers on 5 point Likert scale, where 1
means no impact, 2 means low impact, 3 means medium
impact, 4 means high impact, and 5 means very high
impact.
This type of scale is often used in research and due to the
equal spacing between the single scoring number, an
interval scale is simulated to allow further statistical
analysis.
This assessment should be a personal judgment of the
impact each factor has in the respondent’s company.
Therefore, driver description is provided to ensure that
the participants get the right meaning of the drivers.

Data collection
An email was sent to about 500 senior executives (senior

manager and above) working in the
manufacturing/production departments or corporate
social responsibility (CSR) heads of different
manufacturing firms.
The CSR heads were requested to forward the mail to the
appropriate person responsible for the environmental
initiatives in the company.
This email contained the web link of the survey website,
explained the background and the objective of the study.
The email also assured the confidentiality of the data.

Data analysis
The drivers will be useful for different applications, by

different researchers, in different studies, only if they are
statistically reliable and valid
Reliability reflects the drivers ability to consistently yield the
same response. Reliable drivers will produce the same
results each time it is administered to the same person in
the same setting.
Validity refers to the degree to which drivers truly measure
the factors which they intend to measure.

Reliability Testing Methods
The retest method,

The alternative form method,
The split-halves method, and
The internal consistency method.
– The first three methods have major limitations (particularly for field
studies) such as requiring two independent administrators of the
instrument on the same group of people or requiring two alternate forms
of the measuring instrument.
– In contrast, the internal consistency method works quite well in field
studies because it requires only one administrator. The internal
consistency of a set of measurement items refers to the degree to which
items in the set are homogeneous. Internal consistency can be
estimated using reliability coefficient such as Cronbach’s alpha.

Validity Measurement
Construct validity – multi-trait multi-method analysis, factor

analysis, and correlational and partial correlational
analyses.
Out of these three methods, factor analysis is usually used
to identify items, which should be included in a
consistent measuring instrument.
The appropriateness of the factor model is determined by
examining the strength of the relationship among the
items/variables.
– Correlation matrix,
– Barlett’s test of sphericity and
– Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy

Correlation matrix
Visual inspection of the correlation values between the

items in each measure shows that all the correlations are
greater than 0.3. This implies that the respective items
under each measure are likely to have common factors

Barlett’s test of sphericity
Barlett’s test assesses the overall significance of the

correlation matrix. If the value of the test statistic for
sphericity is large and the associated significance level is
small, it can be concluded that the variables are
correlated.
Barlett’s test of sphericity demonstrated approximate Chi-
square value of 457.834, degree of freedom value (df) of
66.000,and significance level value of 0.000, which are
sufficient values for all the twelve drivers.

KMO measure of sampling adequacy
The test result shows KMO measure of 0.772, which is

above the suggested minimum standard of 0.5 required
for running factor analysis. Hence, based on the above
tests, it is concluded that all the thirteen drivers are
suitable for applying factor analysis.

SEM Model
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
Structural Model

EFA statistics of data
Drivers Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
Current Legislation -0.034 0.802 0.136
Future Legislation -0.028 0.875 0.143
Incentives 0.188 0.623 0.305
Public Pressure 0.428 0.732 -0.070
Cost Savings -0.098 0.286 0.707
Competitiveness 0.180 -0.047 0.812
Customer Demand 0.407 0.277 0.584
Supply Chain Pressure 0.292 0.206 0.621
Top Management 0.759 0.161 0.169
Commitment
Public Image 0.878 0.020 0.095
Technology 0.722 0.060 0.301
Organizational Resources 0.446 0.038 0.584
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Rotation converged in 5 iterations.
SM drivers
Drivers to ECM
implementation
Internal Drivers (ID) Policy Drivers (PD) Economy Drivers (ED)
Top Mgt. Commitment Current Legislation Cost Savings
Org. Resources Incentives Competitiveness
Technology Future Legislation Customer Demand
Public Image Public Pressure Supply Chain Pressure

CFA
Current Legislation
Incentives
Policy
Drivers
Future Legislation
Public Pressure
Top Mgt. Commitment
Org. Resources
Internal
Drivers
Technology
Public Image
Cost Savings
Competitiveness
Economy
Drivers
Customer Demand

Confirmatory factor analysis statistics
Drivers Regression Weights* Regression

Estimate Standard Critical Weights**
Error Ratio
Current Legislation 1.000 ---- ---- 0.761
Future Legislation 1.016 0.141 7.225 0.879
Incentives 0.702 0.135 5.198 0.567
Public Pressure 0.752 0.134 5.617 0.611
Cost Savings 1.000 ---- ---- 0.475
Competitiveness 1.525 0.392 3.892 0.634
Customer Demand 2.158 0.507 4.255 0.822
Supply Chain Pressure 1.868 0.463 4.036 0.687
Top Management 1.000 ---- ---- 0.738
Commitment
Public Image 1.020 0.157 6.482 0.772
Technology 0.942 0.156 6.021 0.700
Organizational Resources 0.778 0.147 5.290 0.608
P < 0.001 (for all coefficients) |* Unstandardized |** Standardized

Structural Model
The factor analysis has a limitation of examining only one

relationship at a time but it is required to study a set of
relationships at a time
This created a need of further analysis using structural
equation modeling (SEM), which is an extension of factor
analysis and multiple regression analysis.
SEM is a statistical technique for testing and estimating
causal relations using a combination of statistical data
and qualitative causal assumptions.
Confirmatory modeling usually starts out with a hypothesis
that gets represented in a causal model.

Hypotheses
Hypothesis (H1): The internal drivers for the

implementation of GM are positively related to policy
drivers.
Hypothesis (H2): The internal drivers for the
implementation of GM are positively related to economy
drivers.
Hypothesis (H3): The policy drivers for the
implementation of GM are positively related to economy
drivers.

Results of hypothesis test
Hypothesis β p Result
value value
H1 The internal drivers for the implementation 0.291 0.036 Accepted
of GM are positively related to policy
drivers.
H2 The internal drivers for the implementation 0.298 0.000 Accepted
of GM are positively related to economy
drivers.
H3 The policy drivers for the implementation of 0.128 0.028 Accepted
GM are positively related to economy
drivers.

Full structural model of drivers
Current Legislation
Incentives
Policy
Drivers
Future Legislation
Top Mgt. Commitment
H1 Public Pressure
Org. Resources
Internal
H3
Drivers
Technology
H2 Cost Savings
Public Image
Competitiveness
Economy
Drivers
Customer Demand

Results and Discussion
CITC analysis eliminated one driver i.e. peer pressure.
Accepted hypotheses show that internal drivers cause policy and
economy drivers, and policy drivers also cause economy drivers.
It reflects that for the effective implementation of SM, internal drivers
are to be investigated first as these are the root drivers to SM
implementation.
For example, the existence and availability of organizational resources
in terms of human and technical resources facilitates and motivates
the government to establish the effective legislation to implement
SM.
Also, the availability of technology motivates the government and other
agencies to think of new legislation which can be forced in future, for
example, the availability of European emission standards 'euro IV'
will cause the establishment of similar standards in developing
countries.

Results and Discussion …
Similarly, if the 'top management commitment' can force the

industry to implement SM, then it will motivate the government
to provide 'incentives' for SM industries, which will further
create 'top management commitment'.
The 'incentives' will lower the cost of manufacturing of product,
hence increases the 'competitiveness'. The availability of
'technology' which is proven better and more efficient than the
existing technology, will generate cost savings, which makes it
possible for the companies to manufacture products of better
quality at lesser cost making the business more competitive.
'Public image' causes the 'competitiveness' as well as 'customer
demand'. Similarly, the 'public pressure' causes the 'customer
demand' in the market for environment friendly products.

Initiatives to be taken to drive
SM implementation
GM awareness campaigns should be organized for the top
management people to ignite top management
commitment.
Formal human and technical skill development programs
should be launched to provide skilled and competitive
human resources for GM implementation.
The government should invest and lay more stress on
research organizations and universities for the
development of technologies and innovations which can
help industry to satisfy their needs of newer
technologies.

Initiatives to be taken to drive
SM implementation …
The industry should also collaborate with academic institutions
and research organizations for skill development and
technology enhancement to build GM implementation
capacity and technology.
Collaborations should be developed particularly among the
developed and developing/emerging nations so that the state
of the art technologies can be made available at affordable
costs with certainty.
Top management should be committed to GM implementation for
smooth and effective adoption. Management should develop
skill enhancement program in terms of environmentally
conscious manufacturing. Management should also provide
finance for better technology.

BITS Pilani
Pilani Campus
Case study
COMPARISION OF DRIVERS
IN INDIA AND GERMANY
A case study has been done to compare the proposed GM
implementation drivers in a developed (Germany) and an
emerging (India) country. To compare the drivers for GM,
a survey was conducted in Germany using face-to-face
interviews followed by responses in the questionnaire.

Descriptive statistics
Drivers Country Mean Std. Deviation
India 3.05 1.214
Current Legislation [D1]
Germany 3.41 1.188
India 3.50 1.336
Future Legislation [D2]
Germany 3.25 1.047
India 3.55 1.143
Incentives [D3]
Germany 2.69 1.030
India 2.95 0.950
Public Pressure [D4]
Germany 2.38 1.129
India 3.05 1.046
Peer Pressure [D5]
Germany 2.50 0.842
India 3.82 1.053
Cost Savings [D6]
Germany 4.03 1.062
India 3.91 1.109
Competitiveness [D7]
Germany 3.94 0.982
India 3.73 0.935
Customer Demand [D8]
Germany 3.22 1.099
India 3.59 1.008
Supply Chain Pressure [D9]
Germany 2.75 1.191
Top Management Commitment India 4.05 1.046
[D10] Germany 3.41 1.188
India 3.86 1.037
Public Image [D11]
Germany 2.91 1.174
India 3.86 1.082
Technology [D12]
Germany 2.91 1.146
India 3.73 1.032
Organizational Resources [D13]
Germany 3.34 1.181

COMPARING MEANS USING
INDEPENDENT T-TEST
Define null and alternate hypotheses The hypotheses defined for the independent t-
test are:
State alpha (α)
H0: µIndia = µGermany (null hypothesis)
H1: µIndia ≠ µGermany (alternate hypothesis)
Calculate degrees of freedom
State decision rule
Calculate test statistic
State results
State conclusion

Independent T-Test statistics to compare
drivers for India and Germany
Drivers Levene's Test* T-test for Equality of Means

Cohen's
d***
F Sig. t df Sig.** MD# SED$
EVA 0.057 0.812 -1.087 52 0.282 -0.361 0.332
D1 EVNA -0.2997
-1.083 44.631 0.285 -0.361 0.333
EVA 1.518 0.223 0.770 52 0.445 0.250 0.325

D2 EVNA 0.20829
0.736 37.901 0.466 0.250 0.340
EVA 0.242 0.625 2.876 52 0.006 0.858 0.298

D3 EVNA 0.79046
2.820 42.087 0.007 0.858 0.304
EVA 2.458 0.123 1.974 52 0.054 0.580 0.294

D4 EVNA 0.54631
2.038 49.780 0.047 0.580 0.284
EVA 0.435 0.512 2.118 52 0.039 0.545 0.258

D5 EVNA 0.57925
2.035 38.707 0.049 0.545 0.268
EVA 0.001 0.974 -0.727 52 0.471 -0.213 0.293

D6 EVNA -0.1985
-0.728 45.561 0.470 -0.213 0.293

Independent T-Test statistics to compare
drivers for India and Germany
Drivers Levene's Test* T-test for Equality of Means Cohen's

F Sig. t df Sig.** MD# SED$ d***
EVA 0.324 0.571 -0.099 52 0.921 -0.028 0.287
D7 -0.0286
EVNA -0.097 41.557 0.923 -0.028 0.293
EVA 1.502 0.226 1.772 52 0.082 0.509 0.287
D8 0.49985
EVNA 1.826 49.559 0.074 0.509 0.278
EVA 1.297 0.260 2.709 52 0.009 0.841 0.310
D9 0.76135
EVNA 2.795 49.680 0.007 0.841 0.301
EVA 1.962 0.167 2.038 52 0.047 0.639 0.314
D10 0.57180
EVNA 2.088 48.779 0.042 0.639 0.306
EVA 0.992 0.324 3.085 52 0.003 0.957 0.310
D11 0.85769
EVNA 3.157 48.693 0.003 0.957 0.303
EVA 0.104 0.748 3.085 52 0.003 0.957 0.310
D12 0.85243
EVNA 3.118 46.960 0.003 0.957 0.307
EVA 0.653 0.423 1.233 52 0.223 0.384 0.311
D13 0.35166
EVNA 1.265 48.951 0.212 0.384 0.303
* for Equality of Variances; ** 2-tailed; #Mean Difference; $Standard Error Difference;
*** To assess effect size

Results of comparison for
drivers
Drivers Comparison Effect size

D1 Equal ----------
D2 Equal ----------
D3 Significantly different Large
D4 Significantly different Medium
D5 Significantly different Medium d = 0.2, means small effect
D6 Equal ---------- d = 0.5, means medium effect
D7 Equal ---------- d = 0.8, means large effect
D8 Equal ----------
D10 Significantly different Medium
D13 Equal ----------

Results
The four drivers incentives, supply chain pressure, public

image, and technology have large differences in the two
countries.
The three drivers public pressure, peer pressure, and top
management commitment are significantly different but
have medium differences in the two countries.
Rest of the five drivers current legislation, future legislation,
cost savings, competitiveness, customer demand, and
organizational resources have same importance in both
the countries.

Thanks

SM #2 Drivers PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SM #2 Drivers PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainable Manufacturing

BITS Pilani K S Sangwan

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Manufacturing firms face multiple motivations called 'drivers'

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Current Legislation Customer Demand

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Pollution control, landfill taxes, emission trading, polluted water

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Expected development of stricter laws, increased level of

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Another driver for industry is the public awareness of

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

A different form of social pressure can be exerted by

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Better process performances, higher product quality, higher

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Consumers are undoubtedly an increasingly important

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Every company is part of a supply chain, consisting of

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Top management commitment has a crucial influence over

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Importance of a positive public perception of your company,

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

A major part of GM is the implementation and usage of new

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Organizational resources refer to all capabilities of the

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Std. Cronbach's Alpha if

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Government Industry perspective Expert perspective

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 D13

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Criteria Definition Criteria

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Peer Pressure Importance of GM Drivers

Supply Chain Pressure

Top Management Commitment

0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6

Closeness Coefficient (CCi)

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Top Management Commitment

Supply Chain Pressure

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Rank Driver Name

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

The results clearly show that driver competitiveness (rank 1) is

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Incentives Cost Savings Competitiveness

Top Management Organizational

Future Supply Chain

Customer Public Peer

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

There are three drivers at level IV termed as organizational level.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

The hierarchy and inter-relationships developed by the ISM

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus